Opinion
No. 05-03-01135-CR
Opinion Filed July 1, 2004. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F03-62888-1K. Dismiss.
Before Justices FITZGERALD, RICHTER, and LANG.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Roland Walker entered a negotiated guilty plea to the offense of possession of less than one gram of cocaine. The trial judge sentenced Walker to 180 days' confinement and a fine of $1500, in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement. The record contains the trial court's certification stating Walker has no right of appeal. Nevertheless, Walker argues this Court possesses jurisdiction over his appeal and that his conviction should be reversed because his plea was not voluntarily made. We address first the threshold issue of our jurisdiction. The fundamental rule for appeal following a plea bargain states:
In a plea bargain case-that is, a case in which defendant's plea is guilty or nolo contendere and the punishment did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant-a defendant may appeal only:
(A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or
(B) after getting the trial court's permission to appeal.Tex.R.App.P. 25.2(2); accord Tex. Code Crim. Pro. Ann. 44.02 (Vernon 1979). Our rules mandate dismissal of an appeal if a certification showing the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the appellate record. Tex.R.App.P. 25.2(d). In this case, Walker's plea of guilty was the result of a plea bargain; the punishment imposed by the court did not exceed that recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by Walker; Walker's complaints do not involve written pretrial motions; and Walker did not obtain the trial court's permission to appeal. Walker is not entitled to appeal. See id. There is no exception to this rule for an appeal challenging the voluntariness of the plea. Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.3d 77, 81 (Tex.Crim.App. 2001). We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Tex.R.App.P. 25.2(d).
We note that Cooper stated:
meritorious claims of involuntary pleas may be raised by other procedures: motion for new trial and habeas corpus. These procedures are not only adequate to resolve claims of involuntary pleas, but they are superior to appeal in that the claim may be supported by information from sources broader than the appellate record.
45 S.W.3d at 82 (footnotes omitted).